The Hedge Fund Law Report

The definitive source of actionable intelligence on hedge fund law and regulation

Articles By Topic

By Topic: Fraudulent Inducement In The Offering of Interests

  • From Vol. 7 No.41 (Oct. 30, 2014)

    A Practical Comparison of Reporting Under AIFMD versus Form PF

    Europe’s Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (AIFMD) is in full effect and the consolidated AIFMD reporting template – commonly referred to as Annex IV – is now final.  Although some fund managers have already filed Annex IV, the vast majority will do so in January 2015, for the reporting period ending on December 31, 2014.  A prior article in the HFLR described efforts to harmonize Annex IV and Form PF.  See “A Practical Guide to AIFMD Reporting for Non-E.U. Fund Managers: Reporting Under AIFMD versus Form PF,” The Hedge Fund Law Report, Vol. 6, No. 20 (May 16, 2013).  This article updates the discussion in that prior article, providing a useful side-by-side comparison of reporting under the two forms.  Firms should take note that even where this comparison highlights similarities between the two forms, there are still certain nuances that could trip up filers (and this article provides examples of such nuances).  The authors of this article are Jeanette Turner, Managing Director & General Counsel at Advise Technologies, LLC; David Vaughan, a partner in Dechert LLP’s Washington, D.C. office; Chris Gardner, a partner in Dechert LLP’s London office; and Rachel Fenwick, an associate in Dechert LLP’s London office.

    Read Full Article …
  • From Vol. 1 No.2 (Mar. 11, 2008)

    Manager of purported hedge fund makes unsuccessful motion to dismiss SEC charges of violations of federal securities laws based on “empty pockets” defense

    • A manager of a purported hedge fund made a motion to dismiss the SEC’s claims of violations of the federal securities laws, arguing that even if the SEC won on the merits, it would not be able to collect anything from him, since British authorities had already seized his assets.
    • The SEC countered that the absence of assets would not bar enforcement of its equitable claims.
    • The court reluctantly (because the defendant offered to settle for an injunction and industry bar) refused to dismiss the SEC’s claims.
    Read Full Article …